I created a new world religion

[crtDzyn]

My sense of humor must be way off...?

[IronGhost]

IronGhost, it's nearly 2:00am here and after another busy and stressful day running after my 5 kids, I needed a quick pick-me-up before I went to bed....

I logged on to UM and thought I haven't got much time, so I needed to find the funniest thread on UM at the moment......And yours did the job.....

Super good! At all times with my involvement with this project, there was a constant element of humor and irony that was inescapable. I was really hoping I could make that come across in th story. I'm glad I succeeded with one person. Not sure if you are laughing at me, or with me, or in derision -- whatever the case -- it's all good.

You have five ids? That's heroic. I have no children of my own, but I come from a family of five children.

Not sure if you are the mom or the dad -- but either way -- I have an inkling of the challenges you must face on a daily basis. Good luck and thanks for your note.

[crtDzyn]

Not sure if you are the mom or the dad

Yeah no hints on that one...

[wilkenator]

Who cares,religions are man made and riddled with hypocrisy anyway. They paid you way to much even if i did believe you, which

I don't.

[Saru]

Last five posts removed

Could those involved please take the matter up in private.

Thank you.

[vcloc]

This made me laugh. You really need to read up on contract law. (FYI: You might want to review your NDA <if it exists> and read it well. I would place money on it that making this thread and posting even simple tenants about this 'religion' is a breech of the NDA. That being said, if you have already breeched the NDA...

Certaintly, I am no expert on contract law.

However, I will say that I am extremely learned on legal confidentiality agreeements, because I have been entering into them for about 20 years.

You see, the majority of my earnings come from ghostwriting books for other people. Over the past two decades, I have signed countless confidentiality agreements, and have seen many permutations thereof. You might say I have been rigorously tested over the past 20 years about just what I can say, and what I cannot say.

So let me assure you, FiveFig, I know for a dead solid fact I have not breeched my contract with the article I published here. This is how I make my living after all. So you can put your mind at ease as to the issue of my contractual obligations -- I lose sleep at night over them -- and I wouldn't have pubished this article so lightly.

And this brings up another point:

The vast majority of my clients are business millionaires and the occasional celebrity. If you hang around these kind of people long enough, you learn something: Big Money and Celebrity is like an exlusive club. There are a lot of connections -- and this network is very global in nature.

That's why it was not at all surpirsing to me when some wealthy Europeans/Americans contacted me with this job or creating a new religion. Somebody gave somebody my name, most likely. One meets a lot of characters like these in this business.

THE FOLLOWING ERROR(S) WERE FOUND

The number of opening and closing quote tags does not match. Please fix this to submit your post.

When I read the article I almost stopped because it contradicted itself in every paragraph almost. You try so hard to make out you did nothing wrong, that you are ethical and have integrity when all your actions surrounding this are the most unethical of all. Whether this is true or not it applies. I agree with Irish, you have been deceptive and this always harms from the start! It is why the world is corrupt and perverted as it is, people like you think they do good when they do bad and make up stupid claims on how they did nothing wrong. People's actions are looked upon not the person, but what they do to others and the affects of that. Even if the religion was well balanced and all good - there is no way to guarantee how it would develop or be modified or manipulated in the future. So what has been done is totally unethical - even if it did not happen and all this is a fictional story. And you know it but make excuses up for your conscience or just because you did it. What else would you do for money? Anyway the European theme gave it all away as what you meant by it all. European rich elite....haha. Yes these people are surely ethical, right. Just as ethical as you - that is why they hire you I am sure.

And as Irish said. Even war criminals (and Nazi scientists that have no regrets - recruited and employed by your government) think and believe they are ethical or are doing good, I am sure they know they do good too. No attack on you but the actions of yours.

Edited March 24, 2008 by vcloc

[SoCrazes]

If one researches the etymology of the word "evil" s/he discover the root of "evil" is deception.

Deception is: misrepresentation: a misleading falsehood; the act of deceiving; the manipulation of perception to alter thoughts and feelings through lies and cleverness.

What were the intentions of the creator of this new religion (though I don't believe he did actually did this - see my earlier post)?

[IronGhost]

When I read the article I almost stopped because it contradicted itself in every paragraph almost. You try so hard to make out you did nothing wrong, that you are ethical and have integrity when all your actions surrounding this are the most unethical of all. Whether this is true or not it applies. I agree with Irish, you have been deceptive and this always harms from the start! It is why the world is corrupt and perverted as it is, people like you think they do good when they do bad and make up stupid claims on how they did nothing wrong. People's actions are looked upon not the person, but what they do to others and the affects of that. Even if the religion was well balanced and all good - there is no way to guarantee how it would develop or be modified or manipulated in the future. So what has been done is totally unethical - even if it did not happen and all this is a fictional story. And you know it but make excuses up for your conscience or just because you did it. What else would you do for money? Anyway the European theme gave it all away as what you meant by it all. European rich elite....haha. Yes these people are surely ethical, right. Just as ethical as you - that is why they hire you I am sure.

And as Irish said. Even war criminals (and Nazi scientists that have no regrets - recruited and employed by your government) think and believe they are ethical or are doing good, I am sure they know they do good too. No attack on you but the actions of yours.

These comments are so profoundly absurd and wrong on so many levels, it's breathtaking.

It's amazing how confused so many people are on the subject of religion.

Listen: Since the beginning of humanity literaly millions of "new religions" have come and gone. The vast majority of all religions on the planet have long since become extinct and faded from memory. Did many of them result in "evil"? or in the misleading of large tracts of human populations? The answer is clearly yes.

The Catholic Church, for example, through it's famous "Inquisition" literally murdered millions of people -- they burned Jews and other "heretics" alive at the stake. They sent vast armies to the mideast to kill and subjugate millions of Muslims. When the Inquisition came to the New World, the result was the killing of an uncounted number of Native Americans, all in the name of the Church. Christian missionaries worked very hard to stamp out the native religions of the indigenous people -- they forbid the practices that existed in the Americas, and even forbid these people to speak their native languages.

The Catholic Inquisition also tried to supress the truth of science -- they placed Galileo under house arrest, and told them they would kill him if he continued to speak the truth about the nature of the solar system. They burned alive the philosopher Giordano Bruno for much the same reasons.

Today we see a radical group of Muslims raging around the world and killing people -- even fellow Muslims -- for not believing in all the "right things" that they believe it.

Muslims are killing Jews -- Jews are killing Muslims. In the former Yugoslavia, Christians and Muslims were at each other's throats to such a vicisous degree, the United States had to bomb them to get them to stop killing each other.

In Sri Lanka, Muslims are killing Hindus, and Hindus are killing Muslims. It's gotten so bad there, even the peaceful Buddhists are being drawn into the violence.

I could go on for endless pages about the murderous outrages and insanities being fueled by most of today's mainstream "respected" religions.

Yet -- with all this going on -- there are people here who would actually compare "little old me" to the Nazis, or suggest my new religion is similar to the creation of the atomic bomb, and say that I am "unethical."

Let me tell you something people -- even if I tried, it would be difficult for me to unleash the evil upon the world we are already getting from all of today's so-called "legitimate" religions" "respected" religions.

If you want to charge someone with a lack of ethics, forget me, and start with the above.

That's my first point.

My next point is this:

All those who adopt my new religion will do so by their own free will, and by making their own choice -- including the choice to reject my religion if they want to.

Can the same be said of the vast majority of people today who belong to existing religions? The answer is clearly "No!"

Very few of today's religions offer the same freedom of choice and thought that my religion offers.

As the great astronomer Carl Sagan said: "Most people today inherit their religion the same way they inherited their eye color -- from their parents."

The fact is, almost no one today was initially given a choice about what their own religious beiefs would be. The vast majority of us were "brainwashed" from the time we were children to believe the religion we were born into is the "only One and True Way." We were also brainwashed into beleiving that "the guy over there in that other church or temple" is on the wrong path, may be going to hell, and may even be dangerous.

None of this can happen in my new religion. It's just one more way that the new religion I created is vastly superior to many of today's respected, mainstream religions.

My third point is this:

The human race is a species that cannot help but to constantly create and innovate new religions -- to be a human being is to struggle and confront the concept of religion. Some scientists even think they have identified a specific gene that actually requires human beings to invent, innovate and practice religions of all kinds. It seems to be something that has evolved into our basic nature.

Indeed, there is evidence that even animals practice religion -- chimpanzees, for example, have been observed practicing strange rituals that have religious qualities -- and we know that elephants bring the bones of their dead to elephant grave yards, where the bones are arranged in ritualisitc patterns -- elephants have also been observed to practice strange rituals over their recently dead.

We know that the extinct Neanderthal man practiced some kind of religion, based on the way they buried their dead.

I'm wondering if that lonely Neanderthal man who was most responsible for creating the tenets of the Neanderthal religion was called an "unethical" cave man the way I am being called "unethical" merely for working at the task of creating a new, better religion, like millions of human beings have done over the millennia?

I wonder if that first chimpanzee who started dancing in front of a waterfall was considered to be "unethical" by his fellow chimps?

What about Martin Luther? He created a new religion -- and now it has splintered into 25,000 different sects. Was he "unethical?"

What about Joseph Smith? -- he created a new religion claiming that an angel gave him golden tablets only he and a few other people saw -- and these golden tablets conveniently disapeared after Smith apparently got out a pencil and some paper and wrote everything down.

Today the Mormons are among the most respected mainstream religions in the world. Even Donny and Marie Osmand are Mormons. Everybody loves Donny and Marie -- and they follow a religion created by a man named Joseph Smith -- a man who was later murdered by a mob.

What about the Moonies?

What about the Hari Krishnas?

What about the folowers of the late Maharishi Mahesh yogi and his TM movement?

What about the followers of Falun Gong?

What about the folowers of Eckankar?

What about the followers of Wicca?

What about the followers of Astara, the occult fraternity establied in 1951 by Earlyne Chaney?

What about the Raelians?

What about the Aquarian Foundation?

What about the Rosicrucians?

What about the Scientologists?

What about the Fellowship of Healing Light founded by Paul Soloman?

What about the URANTIA Brotherhood?

Easily, I could go on for pages naming the new religion created just in the past 2-3 decades.

If you think it's horrible that I created a new religion -- then there's thousands of other for you to worry about as well, so I suggest you get started.

The moral of the story of this:

For anyone hear to declare their moral superiority over me and to denounce what I did as unethical is clearly a person who has never given deep thought about what it is to be a human being, what religion truly is, and how millions of religions have played across the human stage for tens of thousands of years.

Many people are are thinking this way: "I did not create a new religion. Therefore, I am not unethical like Ken Korczak, and therefore I can point my finger at Ken and judge him as less moral than I or others."

Well, anyone who is thinking that is full of crap because the vast majority of you already belong to some religious belief that has it's origin in the mind of some human being somewhere -- and the vast majority of you were brainwashed into your current beief system -- unlike the members of my new religion.

Unlike the members of my new religion -- most of you were blindly, and mindlessly absorbed into your belief system by your society and your culture, and the indoctrination of your parents -- who in turn were indoctrinated by their parents, off into infinity.

I am not better than you or morally superior to you -- just as I am not less ethical than you merely for the fact that I created a new religion and was paid for it -- because ALL religious leaders, founders and promulgators are paid for their work in their respective religions, doing whatever they do.

I beg of all of you -- think more deeply about this -- instead of popping off with emotional reactions based on some blurry concepts of ethics as they relate to religion.

Again -- I don't care if you love me, hate me, believe my story, or don't believe my story -- none of that effects me at all or changes my life in any way-- but whatever you do -- think more deeply about what it means to be a human being, to have a religion as a human being -- and where you came from, and where your own religion came from.

[SoCrazes]

I don't hate you and actually think you're a good person. I think many are surprisingly upset that such an educated, intelligent, and caring person such as yourself could resort to deception for monetary gain. Maybe they fear if you could fall for worshipping mammon, maybe they could too?!

[Mbyte]

So you are comparing your religion to christianity and the inquisition?

You're saying other religions are decieving but your's isen't despite it being created through the same means as the others (you claim other religions were created by such means). It's like your blurring all religions together so it doesn't seem that there is nothing wrong with your religion.

All those who adopt my new religion will do so by their own free will, and by making their own choice -- including the choice to reject my religion if they want to.

They don't realise that your religion is a load of crap. That is decieving!! You lead someone on to believe one thing when your intentions are much different. What I see from the quote above and your first point combined is that your trying to justfy the creation of your religion as non deceivng by saying all religions are deceiving.

If you think it's horrible that I created a new religion -- then there's thousands of other for you to worry about as well, so I suggest you get started.

You're practically saying "Well whats the big deal my religion isen't as bad as the others, It's still bull but it's not evil"

For anyone hear to declare their moral superiority over me and to denounce what I did as unethical is clearly a person who has never given deep thought about what it is to be a human being, what religion truly is, and how millions of religions have played across the human stage for tens of thousands of years.

What is a human being then? I have spent years thinking about it and I'm still clueless. Are we merely materialistic psycological mazes or are we spiritual beings.

I beg of all of you -- think more deeply about this -- instead of popping off with emotional reactions based on some blurry concepts of ethics as they relate to religion.

What is your definition of ethical? From what I can see I don't think you know what is evil and what is not.

Again -- I don't care if you love me, hate me, believe my story, or don't believe my story -- none of that effects me at all or changes my life in any way--but whatever you do -- think more deeply about what it means to be a human being, to have a religion as a human being -- and where you came from, and where your own religion came from.

If it doesn't effect you then why do you reply?

What religion truely is? From what I can conclude from what I have read in your post is that all religions are deceiving. What you seem to suggest is that all religions are bull so it doesn't matter if you create one. You compare to "evil" examples but never to "good" examples. You debate with everything without stating what your ethics are, without stating what you mean or explaining why your religionis ethical. It's hard to know if your twisting your words because you could mean anything.

I beg of all of you -- think more deeply about this -- instead of popping off with emotional reactions based on some blurry concepts of ethics as they relate to religion.

Well obviously you know something we don't and you haven't attempted to explain it. You haven't explained very well because if you had we would be aggreeing with you and not debating. It would connect up logically with us and what your saying isen't. Due to the blurryness of your ethics.

[IronGhost]

I don't hate you and actually think you're a good person. I think many are surprisingly upset that such an educated, intelligent, and caring person such as yourself could resort to deception for monetary gain. Maybe they fear if you could fall for worshipping mammon, maybe they could too?!

No fear there -- certaintly, I do not worship Mammon. That's obvious.

[SoCrazes]

No fear there -- certaintly, I do not worship Mammon. That's obvious.

If you did what you say you did, then you deceived others for worldly gain. Is this not the worship of mammon?

[IronGhost]

If you did what you say you did, then you deceived others for worldly gain. Is this not the worship of mammon?

First, I deceived no one. That's also obvious. It's more than obvious.

Anyone is free to make there own decision as to wether they want to practice my new religion, or not. Leaving people with total freedom of choice, and creating a religion which empowers every individual to create his or her own destiny and reality, and which requires them to give no money to anyone is hardly deception, which is more than can be said of most other religions.

The Catholic Church has real estate holding in the U.S. alone that are worth an estimated $100 billion. Why don't you accuse them of deceit and "worshipping mammon"? They also require that their members donoate 10% of their income to the Church.

My new religion owns no real estate, and no one is required to give money to anyone, much less 10% of their income.

Second, if I "worship mammon" as you say, then why did I spend two years earning zero income working as a volunteer to help homeless people?

In the early 1990s, I was earning about $45,000 a year as a college professor and freelance writer. I gave up this income to work for two years as a VISTA Volunteer. The U.S. VISTA program is the domestic version of the Peace Corps. I lived and worked an an inner city Mission, ate in the soup line with the poor people, slept on a lumpy cot, and the occasional train car, for two years.

I gave up about $90,000 in income over that 2-year period.

How many others here have turned away $90,000? I did.

Hardly the pattern of a person who worships mammon, as I'm sure you would agree.

Edited March 25, 2008 by IronGhost

[Mbyte]

Anyone is free to make there own decision as to wether they want to practice my new religion, or not. Leaving people with total freedom of choice, and creating a religion which empowers every individual to create his or her own destiny and reality, and which requires them to give no money to anyone is hardly deception, which is more than can be said of most other religions.

You don't offer them the truth. You don't make any claims about truth. Is there truth? Does it exist in your mentality?

They are free to either practice or not to practice the religion. They are free to not to practice a fabricated religion and practice a fabricated religion. Are you not adding to the confusion of the pursuit of truth sense your raligion is bullsh**?

Maybe the religion does lead to the search for truth but then your bullsh** religion isen't bullsh**. You could say everything we have thought is on a foundation of bullsh** but for convinience it would be better not to mention that it's bullsh** at all. This all depends if the practice of the religion it's self means anything or leads to something of value.

Edited March 25, 2008 by Mbyte

[IronGhost]

You don't offer them the truth. You don't make any claims about truth. Is there truth? Does it exist in your mentality?

They are free to either practice or not to practice the religion. They are free to not to practice a fabricated religion and practice a fabricated religion. Are you not adding to the confusion of the pursuit of truth sense your raligion is bullsh**?

Maybe the religion does lead to the search for truth but then your bullsh** religion isen't bullsh**. You could say everything we have thought is on a foundation of bullsh** but for convinience it would be better not to mention that it's bullsh** at all. This all depends if the practice of the religion it's self means anything or leads to something of value.

ALL religions are fabricated.

As for the Truth -- I will patiently await anyone here who claims to know the Truth -- the Truth with a Capital "T" -- to please enlighten all of us.

[Harriet The Ripperologist]

Theoretically, can't anyone create their own religion? There's got to be a few religions out there that exist but don't have many followers so aren't as publicised.

[Mbyte]

ALL religions are fabricated.

As for the Truth -- I will patiently await anyone here who claims to know the Truth -- the Truth with a Capital "T" -- to please enlighten all of us.

So your exploiting the fact that people practice your religion because they want to find out the truth? What other reason would make the practitioner practice your religion. So basically your saying you can't possibly decieve anyone becasue there is nothing for the religion to deceive. This has got Zen all over it.

Why did you make a religion that doesn't break the law if the law is fabricated?

What is your definition of ethical?

Theoretically, can't anyone create their own religion? There's got to be a few religions out there that exist but don't have many followers so aren't as publicised.

There are lots and lots of religions that non of us here about

Edited March 25, 2008 by Mbyte

[SoCrazes]

First, I deceived no one. That's also obvious. It's more than obvious.

Anyone is free to make there own decision as to wether they want to practice my new religion, or not. Leaving people with total freedom of choice, and creating a religion which empowers every individual to create his or her own destiny and reality, and which requires them to give no money to anyone is hardly deception, which is more than can be said of most other religions.

The Catholic Church has real estate holding in the U.S. alone that are worth an estimated $100 billion. Why don't you accuse them of deceit and "worshipping mammon"? They also require that their members donoate 10% of their income to the Church.

My new religion owns no real estate, and no one is required to give money to anyone, much less 10% of their income.

Second, if I "worship mammon" as you say, then why did I spend two years earning zero income working as a volunteer to help homeless people?

In the early 1990s, I was earning about $45,000 a year as a college professor and freelance writer. I gave up this income to work for two years as a VISTA Volunteer. The U.S. VISTA program is the domestic version of the Peace Corps. I lived and worked an an inner city Mission, ate in the soup line with the poor people, slept on a lumpy cot, and the occasional train car, for two years.

I gave up about $90,000 in income over that 2-year period.

How many others here have turned away $90,000? I did.

Hardly the pattern of a person who worships mammon, as I'm sure you would agree.

You have led an admirable life and I commend you for it; however, I'm bewildered because you fabricated a story "of Truth" for money knowing that the intention of this story was to bring believers into the fold.

Yes, for the most part I agree that all religions are fabricated; however, the old addage "two wrongs don't make a right" seems to stick out in mind.

The "Truth" is allusive and known by few if any. I feel that I'd be in the wrong to mislead one, let alone many, down a wrong path in searching for the Truth even by accident...let alone intentionally.

[IronGhost]

So your exploiting the fact that people practice your religion because they want to find out the truth? What other reason would make the practitioner practice your religion. So basically your saying you can't possibly decieve anyone becasue there is nothing for the religion to deceive. This has got Zen all over it.

Why did you make a religion that doesn't break the law if the law is fabricated?

What is your definition of ethical?

Well ... I don't think I am "exploiting" people's desire to seek truth. That's because I have long held the view that the "Truth" does not need to be found because the "Truth" was never lost by anyone. To say that people are "seeking the truth" presumes that the "Truth" went somewhere, or was somehow lost, or had yet to be found. That's not the case.

When a person actively attempts to "seek" the "Truth" that atempt is fundamentally futile. Everyone and everything already is the Truth -- but having said that, one must keep in mind that what everyone generally considers to be "Truth" is basically a magical concept.

Again, who here can tell me what the "Truth" is? The fact is, no one can.

A lot of people no doubt will offer a definition of the "Truth" or their concept of the "Truth" or what they think the "Truth" is, but in the end, is that really the "Truth"?

However, what I'm not talking about here is some kind of moral relativism -- and the fact that the "Truth" is impossible define also does not provide anyone with some kind of license to be unethical, or do anything they want.

I would say that part of my definition of ethics is: "If you can do no good, at least do not harm."

Probably 75% of all the trouble in the world has been caused by people who thought they were doing good, or tried to do something good. It reminds me of the old saying: "The road to hell is paved with good intentions."

[largeGROUCH]

Hi Ken, I have a StumbleUpon site and as I was Stumbling around, I found your blog. I stumble and read many topics, but few capture my interest as your's has. I started with "Multiple universes: The evidence is good" and then went to "27 years of Zen destroyed my life" and, for the moment, finished with "I created a new world religion ". I'm not sure what it is, exactly, but your style captures my imagination. I've enjoyed your work so much that I registered, uploaded an avatar and here I am replying to you... I guess that, in part, we share many interests. I found myself saying "That's right.", "Of course.", "How could it be otherwise?" ... You get my drift. In "27 years of Zen...", you put my path, and my feelings about that path, into clear words. Now, I call that VERY strange, as I hadn't actually expressed those words to myself, let alone, anyone else. In "I created a new world religion", you lost me. Not that I wasn't swept along, but that I wasn't sure whether you wrote it tongue in cheek, or if it ACTUALLY happened. Either way, it's a great piece. It's just that I had a difficult time believing in the characters, and to a lesser extent, the scenes you described. And something telles me that you are NOT above pulling the collective leg of your audience... Well, that's my little blurb, for now. Be well & Take care, Rich aka largeGROUCH

[Mbyte]

Well ... I don't think I am "exploiting" people's desire to seek truth. That's because I have long held the view that the "Truth" does not need to be found because the "Truth" was never lost by anyone. To say that people are "seeking the truth" presumes that the "Truth" went somewhere, or was somehow lost, or had yet to be found. That's not the case.

When a person actively attempts to "seek" the "Truth" that atempt is fundamentally futile. Everyone and everything already is the Truth -- but having said that, one must keep in mind that what everyone generally considers to be "Truth" is basically a magical concept.

Again, who here can tell me what the "Truth" is? The fact is, no one can.

A lot of people no doubt will offer a definition of the "Truth" or their concept of the "Truth" or what they think the "Truth" is, but in the end, is that really the "Truth"?

However, what I'm not talking about here is some kind of moral relativism -- and the fact that the "Truth" is impossible define also does not provide anyone with some kind of license to be unethical, or do anything they want.

I would say that part of my definition of ethics is: "If you can do no good, at least do not harm."

Probably 75% of all the trouble in the world has been caused by people who thought they were doing good, or tried to do something good. It reminds me of the old saying: "The road to hell is paved with good intentions."

Now thats the post I've been waiting for. I knew Zen was involved some wear, things weren't adding up. I don't see how you can say there is no truth and still say that this doesn't allow people to be unethical. What do I have to do to harm someone? I can't decieve them in searching for the truth because I can't foil their attempts to "seek" the "Truth", the truth was never lost. I can't harm anyone because they are harming themselves with their illusions and preconceptions. It's not my fault. Thus ethics, like truth is a magical concept.

Well universally the truth can't be lost but in terms of intelligence we must understand and know. This is how one attains the truth and in terms of intelligence the truth can be found. The nature of the universe just is but we don't know. We have a constant illusion and a constant preconception that can't be eluded and that is our mind/brain/life. You can't deny our existance, mainly because we exist. Someone severes your arm. It will result in pain and heart ache. Of course all I have to do is realise nothing has changed. I can still grieve over my arm (Nothing has changed) but the grief is due to my illusions and preconceptions so I can realise this and not grieve over my arm (Still nothing has changed?) I can't see anything about ethics here. I also can't see how nothing has changed when something clearly has changed.

You could be stuck in the freezing snow and as a result you could die. You may have heard of g tummo. A meditation which can heat your body up in cold weather. You can say well I have achieved the meditation because it didn't go anywear. However you would most likely die trying to heat your body up. This means you havn't achieved it. That means universally you have it but you must achieve it. You must achieve balance like a cat and you must achieve a 300lb deadlift. The truth is achievable. What if we are mentally wired to seek the truth. You said they might have found a gene which makes us predispositioned to be in a religion or follow a religion or create them. Don't you think it would be a bit odd that we could be predispositioned to seek the truth despite it being a magical illusionary concept, like religion .

Probably 75% of all the trouble in the world has been caused by people who thought they were doing good, or tried to do something good. It reminds me of the old saying: "The road to hell is paved with good intentions."

If I were to use the KKK as an example to the quote above I would say they that they hid their fears or some form of mental dishormony by saying it's good. They put what they were doing in the context of good to give them reasurance that it wasn't bad and it escallated to become truth and the true underlying reason was forgotton.

[IronGhost]

Now thats the post I've been waiting for. I knew Zen was involved some wear, things weren't adding up. I don't see how you can say there is no truth and still say that this doesn't allow people to be unethical.

But I never said there "is no truth" -- in fact, I said just the opposite. I said the Truth is with us all the time, is here now and everywhere, but that most people have come to believe the Truth is lost, and they must go out and find it, or try to somehow uncover it with their intelligence -- that's ridiculous.

What they end up producing are all kinds of bizarre concepts -- and then very often -- they start killing each other because no ne agrees on the definition of the truth.

People using their intelligence to "find the truth" is what is causing all of the problems in the world.

My wife is a conservative, Bible believing Christian. She thinks that Jesus Christ is her savior, and that all the truth anyone needs can be found in his teachings. I ask her sometimes if that is true, then why have the teachings of Christ caused millions of Christians to kill millions of other people over the centuries? And she says they are misunderstanding the central truths of Jesus' teachings.

Well, fine -- but the fact remains, the great truths Jesus supposedly gave us have caused wars, subjugation of women and other groups, endless scandals, as with Catholic priests raping tens of thousands of children around the world -- just endless amounts of pain, tragedy, human suffering and chaos.

Yet these Christians believe they are on "the path of Truth."

It's ridiculous.

People should never go out and acvtively "seek the Truth" because it is not only so obviously ridiculous to do so, but an impossible task.

Rather, people must realize that they do not "go to the truth -- but rather, the Truth will come to them when they are ready to receive it.

Whenever someone tries to "seek" "find" "discover" "create" "understand" the Truth -- they are doing just exactly the wrong thing.

So, you will never ever "find" the Truth -- you can only let the Truth "find" you.

If you stop seeking the Truth, or trying to understand the Truth, you will stay out of a huge amount of trouble in your life -- and the less trouble you have, the greater the chances are that the Truth will come to you all that much sooner -- even though it is already here, and never went anywhere in the first place.

Edited March 26, 2008 by IronGhost

[IronGhost]

Hi Ken, I have a StumbleUpon site and as I was Stumbling around, I found your blog. I stumble and read many topics, but few capture my interest as your's has. I started with "Multiple universes: The evidence is good" and then went to "27 years of Zen destroyed my life" and, for the moment, finished with "I created a new world religion ". I'm not sure what it is, exactly, but your style captures my imagination. I've enjoyed your work so much that I registered, uploaded an avatar and here I am replying to you... I guess that, in part, we share many interests. I found myself saying "That's right.", "Of course.", "How could it be otherwise?" ... You get my drift. In "27 years of Zen...", you put my path, and my feelings about that path, into clear words. Now, I call that VERY strange, as I hadn't actually expressed those words to myself, let alone, anyone else. In "I created a new world religion", you lost me. Not that I wasn't swept along, but that I wasn't sure whether you wrote it tongue in cheek, or if it ACTUALLY happened. Either way, it's a great piece. It's just that I had a difficult time believing in the characters, and to a lesser extent, the scenes you described. And something telles me that you are NOT above pulling the collective leg of your audience... Well, that's my little blurb, for now. Be well & Take care, Rich aka largeGROUCH

Your comments are more than kind -- welcome to UM, I hope you like it here as much as I do. Also, we just don't have enough cat wizard avatars here.

You know, when you say that I "lost you" with the religion story -- well, that's the way it goes, I guess. When one has been in the writing biz long enough, you get used to the fact that there will always be something that you write which will turn people off -- but if writer's don't constanty try to push the envelope, and take risks, the rest of their writing will remain flat, and never get anywhere.

All artists experience the fact that some of there work is not liked, or reviled for some reason -- think about the Rollings Stones, for example. They have legions of worhsipping fans and have been perhaps the most popular rock band in the world for 45 years, almost half a century -- yet I still hear all the time people say things like: "Boy, that song the Stones did really sucks -- or, they're a great band, but what were they thinking when they made that one album, they really blew it!" Or some people say, "How can anyone loike the Rollng Stones. All their music sucks."

Or some people say they love all of an artists paintings, but then say: "Except that one -- he must have been having a bad day when he painted that."

The other thing to notice is how many people will love a certain piece of art, while other wil hate it. They all see it differently. This story about the religion I created is a case in point -- my mail is running about 65% "loved it" and 35% "hated it." Some people ont his thread have even said they'll never read another one of my stories.

But -- thats the way it goes. As much as I hate to stoop to cliche -- If one can't take the heat, one must stay out of the kitchen.

I like to be in the kitchen cooking all the time.

[crtDzyn]

Care to snag me something for lunch while you're there?

[IronGhost]

Care to snag me something for lunch while you're there?

Yes, crtbud, I will prepare for you an extravagent lunch, which I hope you will apperciate. Here is the banquet I offer to you:

Steamed pork and chicken

boiled crayfish flavored with red pepper

boiled choat fish

boiled squid

canned kipper from Norway

Sardines in mustard or tomato sauce

raw fish in lime juice

Tulebee fish fried in garlic butter

fish balls in coconut cream

A large bowl of poi

rice

bananas

papaya

avocacados

minced clams in coconut curd

heart of palm

octopus stewed in its own ink

and for desert:

custard made with canned milk infused with vanilla and coffee beans

After your lunch, you will be offered a cigar smuggled into the United States from Cuba.

While you smoke your cigar, you will be offered a cold glass of the finest Russian Vodak, hand made by barefoot virgins from the plains of Kurkmanst.

Edited March 26, 2008 by IronGhost